ncloud_list_public_ips

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With readOnlyHint=true already present, the description still adds value by disclosing a non-obvious behavior: the Public IP API returns no product code, which directly affects downstream pricing workflows. It also clarifies the current-region scope. It does not cover pagination behavior, but the schema already documents pagination parameters.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences with zero waste. The primary purpose is front-loaded, and the caveat plus pricing alternative are delivered in a single dependent clause. Every sentence earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a read-only listing tool with no required parameters and fully documented optional parameters, the description covers purpose, region scope, a critical output caveat, and the appropriate follow-up tool. It could describe its return format more fully, given there is no output schema, but the essential operational context is present.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

All four parameters are already described in the input schema (100% coverage), so the description does not add parameter-level meaning. The note about product code is about output, not parameters, so it holds at the schema-coverage baseline of 3.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource: 'List all public IP instances in the current region.' The scope ('current region') and the 'list all' phrasing distinguish it from detail, creation, and association siblings like ncloud_get_public_ip_detail and ncloud_create_public_ip, even without naming them.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly routes the agent to ncloud_get_product_price_list for pricing with a precise argument (productName='Public IP'), which is a clear alternative. It does not mention when to choose detail/association tools instead, so guidance stops short of being fully exhaustive.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.